Σχόλια 0

Το κείμενο του εγγράφου

W3C Site Redesign Survey1 / 3740.63%9144.20%9930.80%6916.52%3727.68%627.59%1712.50%28Q1How would you describeyourself?Answered: 224Skipped: 30%20%40%60%80%100%Web designerWebapplicationdeveloperUserexperiencedesigner/i...ProjectmanagerWebtechnologyengineerDepartmentheadOther (pleasespecify)Web designerWeb application developerUser experience designer/information architect/contentstrategistProject managerWeb technology engineerDepartment headOther (please specify)Total Respondents:Total Respondents:224224#Other (please specify)Date1Accessibility standards expert5/21/2013 11:12 AM2an accountant clerk5/21/2013 6:49 AM3teacher of Web development5/20/2013 10:31 AM4University Proffessor (teaching HCI and accessibility)5/20/2013 6:41 AM5architecture5/18/2013 5:30 PM6Design Director5/17/2013 4:58 PM7Typographer5/16/2013 6:50 PM8Researcher5/16/2013 5:33 PM9Front-end developer5/16/2013 10:49 AM10standardista5/16/2013 8:54 AM11web accessibility expert5/16/2013 5:34 AMAnswer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey2 / 3712front-end web developer5/16/2013 5:23 AM13Educator5/16/2013 3:55 AM14CEO5/16/2013 1:33 AM15web accessibility specialist5/16/2013 1:00 AM16Front-end developer5/15/2013 11:38 PM17marketing and sales.5/15/2013 10:06 PM18trainer5/15/2013 7:47 PM19W3C staff5/15/2013 6:33 PM20Web standards and accessibility advisor5/15/2013 5:25 PM21Mathematician5/15/2013 4:25 PM22Researcher5/15/2013 4:20 PM23lawyer, deanonymized5/15/2013 3:41 PM24Microsoft Open Technologies5/15/2013 3:37 PM25Amateur5/15/2013 3:18 PM26Accessibility Consultant5/15/2013 2:43 PM27Lecturer, teaching web technologies to students5/15/2013 1:58 PM28JavaScript Developer5/15/2013 1:51 PM#Other (please specify)DateW3C Site Redesign Survey3 / 3734.08%7619.73%4421.97%4912.56%283.59%85.38%120.90%250.22%112Q2What types of groups do youparticipate in? (select all applicable)Answered: 223Skipped: 40%20%40%60%80%100%Working GroupInterestGroupCommunityGroupBusinessGroupAdvisoryBoardAdvisoryCommitteeTAGNone (We willignore otherselections...Working GroupInterest GroupCommunity GroupBusiness GroupAdvisory BoardAdvisory CommitteeTAGNone (We will ignore other selections if you choose thisoption.)Total Respondents:Total Respondents:223223Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey4 / 376.67%159.33%218.89%202.67%681.78%184Q3What roles (if any) do you havewithin a W3C group?Answered: 225Skipped: 2ChairTeam contactEditorTest managerNone (We will ignore other selections if you choose thisoption.)Total Respondents:Total Respondents:225225Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey5 / 3790.91%309.09%3Q4Would you find it useful if W3Cwere to provide templates for grouphome pages (e.g,. to provide aconsistent user experience acrossgroups, and to automate some WGtasks)?Answered: 33Skipped: 1940%20%40%60%80%100%YesNoYesNoTotalTotal3333Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey6 / 3775.76%2524.24%8Q5Do you think it would be usefulto distinguish a group's "public"home page (for visitors) from its"operations" home page (whichwould also be public, but focus onmeeting details, etc.)?Answered: 33Skipped: 1940%20%40%60%80%100%YesNoYesNoTotalTotal3333Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey7 / 37Q6If we were to separate the twopages, what information would youput on the group's "public" homepage vs. its public "operations"home page?Answered: 19Skipped: 208#ResponsesDate1"Public" page: Goals of the group, current status, members, external links (related tutorials, blogposts, etc.)5/22/2013 11:55 PM2public link to public specification and to information related to publicoperations meeting agenda,teleconf (if not public), charter, deadlines, etc, current drafts5/22/2013 6:54 AM3operations: internal communication channels, F2F details, issue tracker, etc.public: everything else5/22/2013 6:14 AM4public relations issues, it wll also be private to an extent only pertaining toit' s group of peopleknowledgeable to one skill.5/18/2013 5:42 PM5Outline and links5/18/2013 8:36 AM6public:very basic information about the group (name, why it exists, what it does)operations:currentprojects, membership5/17/2013 8:13 AM7public: brief description of what the group does, news, announcements, links to specs and otherresources, esp educational, milestone overview operations: work in progress, charter, meetings,archives, participants, how to join, patent policyNote that I would rather see 'public' pages as anaggregation of all WGs in an Activity - not one per WG!5/16/2013 8:58 AM8This is a dumb question. There is no reason grops should ahve only two pages. history of drafts,minutes, details of upcoming meetings, future of work, all these things are important. So there5/16/2013 4:08 AM9more examples and complex sextion videos5/16/2013 1:39 AM10What's the group for, what are its deliverables, what has it delivered, current work status, links to workoutputvsMeeting logistics, Good Standing status etc.5/16/2013 12:14 AM11on the public page you should include some basic information about the group alongside biggergroup events, whilst the more nitty gritty stuff would be on the operations page.5/15/2013 10:59 PM12On the public "operations" home page: administrative information, logistics information, process andguidebook links, etc.On the "public" homepage without "operations" parts: how to join de group,current work, work habits (how often group meets, where to find minutes, etc.), etc.5/15/2013 6:37 PM13(quick thoughts -- not going over all the ones I maintain -- this is Sandro)I'm split about whether thereshould be a split.I do think people in the WG need info that would be noise to the public, but ideally itcan be there, somewhat hidden, available for anyone who wants it -- in the WG or not.public-facing:public side of the document roadmap:what drafts the public should reviewpast/expected versions ofthose draftseasy links to issues/commentsweekly news (which is probably just decisions scheduledfor the next meeting and made at the last one -- unless the chair is willing to write something)chartermembership - who is in the grouphow to get involvedgroup-facing:more detailed version ofdocument roadmap:include action itemswho needs to review what by whencomment trackingrecent and upcoming meetingslinks to relevant pages & tools, eg ReSpec if the group uses ReSpeclinks to internal discussion documents5/15/2013 5:53 PM14Home page: summary of group charter and purpose, date established, end date, summaries of maindeliverables and status, links to meeting minutes, actual charter, actual deliverables, main contactsand chairs. Operations: Account of meeting schedule and other logistics,5/15/2013 5:36 PM15Public: news, specs, feedback, short blurb, contact people (team and chair) Operations: everythingelse5/15/2013 4:38 PM16Public: overview, how to get involved for newbies,Operations: minutes, mailing lists, meeting times,Both (via db/includes?):currently active documents and drafts5/15/2013 3:43 PM17The public home page would be easy to consume - general info.The operations page would involvemuch more technical and detailed information.5/15/2013 3:43 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey8 / 3718They are already separate today.5/15/2013 3:33 PM19First of all, in response to the yes / no questions previously asked, it is only useful to providetemplates if they meet the needs of the WG. If they don't leave room for critical information or havefeature problems, I can't use them.Public: mission of the group, links to TR and editors' drafts,participants list, how to joinOperations: how to join (again), meeting information (telecon and FtF),minutes links, infrastructure pointers (wiki, tracker, WBS URL, etc.)5/15/2013 2:20 PM#ResponsesDateW3C Site Redesign Survey9 / 3715.96%3484.04%179Q7Do you work for a W3C Member?Answered: 213Skipped: 140%20%40%60%80%100%YesNoYesNoTotalTotal213213Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey10 / 370%011.11%329.63%829.63%811.11%314.81%43.70%1Q8How often do you visit theMember home page?Answered: 27Skipped: 2000%20%40%60%80%100%DailyWeeklyMonthlyA few times ayearI have nevervisited theMember hom...I have nevervisited theMember hom...Other (pleasespecify)DailyWeeklyMonthlyA few times a yearI have never visited the Member home page.I have never visited the Member home page and didn't evenknow there was one!Other (please specify)TotalTotal2727#Other (please specify)Date1I have apparently visited the Member homepage but didn't recall it5/15/2013 3:46 PMAnswer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey11 / 37Q9What features or improvementswould you most like to see on aMember home page?Answered: 9Skipped: 218#ResponsesDate1More clarity in the design. Less cruft. More focus.5/22/2013 6:16 AM2As I haven't used it, I have no features or improvements to suggest.5/20/2013 6:44 AM3Usability5/17/2013 5:15 PM4The member home page is a good jumping point to a number of useful services. I quite like it as it is.5/17/2013 2:53 AM5Stuff about my organisation's participation (who, what groups, how to join/leave a new group)...butMOST IMPORTANTLY integrate the Community Group stuff better, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.5/16/2013 4:13 AM6Activity graph of each WG/IG/BG.5/15/2013 10:13 PM7Generally, like the site. Would like a way to easily find member names, roles, company, from the mainpage.5/15/2013 5:47 PM8The site needs a full redesign. It's current organization is somewhat chaotic and it's normally difficult tofind the information you're looking for. A full refresh of it's "look". In general, the site looks like websitesused to look 15 years ago.5/15/2013 4:55 PM9some (gasp) personalization: items relevant to your WGs, such as... those described below...5/15/2013 3:46 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey12 / 3768.42%1331.58%6Q10Should the Member home pagebecome a customized “dashboard”with information or links specific toyou, such as: identity (name,affiliation), lists of groupmembership with your organization,etc.?Answered: 19Skipped: 2080%20%40%60%80%100%YesNoYesNoTotalTotal1919Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey13 / 3766.67%1250%933.33%611.11%238.89%722.22%411.11%2Q11What sections of the Membersite do you most use?Answered: 18Skipped: 2090%20%40%60%80%100%Calendar ofMember EventsMemberActions,News, Mail...Process,PatentPolicy,...MemberStandardsPromotionMembershipAdministriviaList of ACRepsStaff FTEtables(summarize...Calendar of Member EventsMember Actions, News, Mail, DiscussionProcess, Patent Policy, Finances GuideMember Standards PromotionMembership AdministriviaList of AC RepsStaff FTE tables (summarized by activity)Total Respondents:Total Respondents:1818Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey14 / 37Q12What information have you haddifficulty finding on the Membersite?Answered: 10Skipped: 217#ResponsesDate1pretty much everything is hard to find unless you know exactly where it is.5/22/2013 6:16 AM2Haven't used any5/20/2013 6:44 AM3When and Which spec will be update(including progress)5/19/2013 7:15 PM4There used to be a way to see details of my member's contract and so on. The resource athttp://www.w3.org/Systems/db/viewMembership now redirects tohttps://www.w3.org/2004/12/accounts-management/ which is also a useful page, but not the one Iwant.5/17/2013 2:53 AM5Almost everything I have ever looked for. It has improved, but the improvements provided some jarringreadjustments.5/16/2013 4:13 AM6It took a time to find which groups I and my companies colleagues are joining.5/15/2013 10:13 PM7Members names and info from each member company.5/15/2013 5:47 PM8information about my current contract, current Member dues, billing contact.5/15/2013 5:40 PM9open issues/actions/polls5/15/2013 3:46 PM10future ac meetings - the link to ac meetings goes to a page that only talks about historical data.5/15/2013 3:34 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey15 / 37Q13What features or improvementswould you most like to see in theMember site (other than to theMember home page) in the future?Answered: 5Skipped: 222#ResponsesDate1I think that the possibility of a customized "dashboard" (question 7) would be very useful.5/20/2013 6:44 AM2Make requesting an account for someone, and adding them to a group, a less confusing experience.5/16/2013 4:13 AM3n/a5/15/2013 5:47 PM4A real membership viewer: current one has not worked for a good while.5/15/2013 5:40 PM5"do my work for me"5/15/2013 3:46 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey16 / 3715.79%326.32%536.84%721.05%4Q14Because much informationuseful to Members exists on thepublic site, please indicate howimportant it is to you to access thatinformation directly from theMember site?Answered: 19Skipped: 2080%20%40%60%80%100%EssentialImportantSomewhatUsefulNot usefulEssentialImportantSomewhat UsefulNot usefulTotalTotal1919Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey17 / 37Q15Which links to the public siteare most important for you to findfrom the Member site?Answered: 4Skipped: 223#ResponsesDate1As a member, I don't make a distinction between the member site and the public site. For me, all ofthis is the same, with slightly annoying password requests from time to time. I do not know when I'mon the member site and when I'm not.5/22/2013 6:16 AM2Access to drafts, minutes... associated with my activities.5/20/2013 6:44 AM3I don't care where I find them from. With a fair idea of what is public, I just use Yandex to find publicresources, so I only look for member resources from the member site :(5/16/2013 4:13 AM4mailing lists, WG homepages, WG join information5/15/2013 3:46 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey18 / 377.47%1331.61%5524.14%4232.18%562.30%42.30%4Q16How often do you visit the W3Chome page?Answered: 174Skipped: 530%20%40%60%80%100%DailyWeeklyMonthlyA few times ayearI have nevervisited theW3C home pageOther (pleasespecify)DailyWeeklyMonthlyA few times a yearI have never visited the W3C home pageOther (please specify)TotalTotal174174#Other (please specify)Date1Never visited the home page, visited certain specs through doing google searches though.5/16/2013 3:00 AM2Unclear whether you refer to the start page only or pages below it. If the lattter, weekly to daily (mainlyto answer to surveys).5/16/2013 1:31 AM3as needed5/15/2013 3:35 PM4I visit parts of the site at least monthly, more if doing an accessiblity proejct5/15/2013 3:23 PMAnswer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey19 / 3744.94%7136.71%5815.82%254.43%754.43%8677.85%1231.27%2Q17What features/information doyou use on the current home page?Answered: 158Skipped: 690%20%40%60%80%100%NewsW3C blogTalks andEventsLinks to jobsLinks tovalidatorsLinks tostandards andother...MembertestimonialNewsW3C blogTalks and EventsLinks to jobsLinks to validatorsLinks to standards and other materialsMember testimonialTotal Respondents:Total Respondents:158158Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey20 / 37Q18What features or improvementswould you most like to see on thepublic home page?Answered: 45Skipped: 182#ResponsesDate1Better organization. Less clutter. Clearer actionable things to do depending on the audience.5/22/2013 6:17 AM2easier access to standard documents5/20/2013 10:33 AM3None5/20/2013 6:44 AM4Progressive Disclosure. Not sure that the chronological listing of news should be the dominentnmeans of representing info.5/19/2013 7:33 AM5Improve readability, usability, look and feel of specs5/19/2013 6:45 AM6Responsive design would be great!5/18/2013 11:17 AM7I'm not terribly invested in the home page--it's just one more way, on top of my browser bookmarksand Google, to get me to the content I'm seeking.The better it can do that the happier I am.5/17/2013 9:51 AM8Better accessibility!5/17/2013 6:30 AM9Better, cleaner way to get to specification.5/17/2013 3:55 AM10Documentation5/16/2013 9:38 PM11I've never used the home page5/16/2013 4:48 PM12Less content and more white space5/16/2013 2:28 PM13direct links to most popular standards5/16/2013 11:48 AM14A more structured index of materials and documents.5/16/2013 9:19 AM15easier to find things - the 'standards' links are useful for exploring randomly, or for newcomers, butoften a pain if you want to find something quickly without trying to guess which bucket the link sits in5/16/2013 9:01 AM16A good overview for all news/blog feeds.5/16/2013 8:16 AM17Note: What I use normally is the search field. But it is not in the item before.5/16/2013 6:22 AM18A tailored specification search would be useful. Right now, when I enter “CSS” in the Google searchbox at the top, I get mostly irrelevant stuff, hard to sift through. Instead I would like to see a clear,preferably short, list of relevant specifications, ordered and colored by their status (Rec → ... → WGNote) etc. Other, non-spec hits could be listed further below.5/16/2013 6:05 AM19Visual design, easier way to help and participate.5/16/2013 5:42 AM20More advertising of the members :) (Plus whatever the people who do use it want)5/16/2013 4:14 AM21A cleaner interface, easier to navigate to key parts of the website.5/16/2013 3:00 AM22More document translated5/16/2013 2:09 AM23standards news5/16/2013 1:40 AM24The home page itself is pretty unimportant for me.5/16/2013 1:31 AM25better search feature. Better API Declaration like Java API style.5/16/2013 1:10 AM26I guess it would be useful if the home page were a better navigational starting point for the work of theW3C5/16/2013 12:15 AM27Better design to improve usability. Quick links to spec reference.5/15/2013 11:36 PM28information on how to get involved with w3c5/15/2013 11:03 PM29an overall more updated look, maybe a little less busy5/15/2013 11:01 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey21 / 3730Having quicker access to references would be nice. Maybe have a reference guide you can downloador make into an app for each language.5/15/2013 10:57 PM31less stuff.5/15/2013 8:23 PM32make it easier to find relevant specifications.If I go to the home page looking for the HTML5 spec, Ihave to click View All (because I don't know which category is best), HTML, and scroll waaaaay down toHTML5).Do you look at your analytics and see what pages your visitors are flocking to?It seems to methat this would be one of the hottest topics right now... why aren't there quick and obvious links abovethe fold on the home page to the hottest topics?5/15/2013 7:50 PM33A more readable website. Especially the standards/working draft areas. Please use a reasonablemeasure (width) for reading.5/15/2013 6:29 PM34It makes me a little uncomfortable that the W3C uses google for an enterprise search engine.5/15/2013 6:28 PM35More linking to education materials5/15/2013 5:56 PM36Would like to discover Interest Groups easily.5/15/2013 5:49 PM37Finding specs, with a strong focus on the browser ones. Finding groups, most importantly to providefeedback.5/15/2013 4:39 PM38the groupings under "standards" seem rather random. What's the difference between "News" and"Blog" and why are they two?5/15/2013 3:49 PM39publication status/progress.5/15/2013 3:44 PM40Being powered by RichStyle framework: http://richstyle.org5/15/2013 3:32 PM41Some tutorial on Web Standard. Web Technology Usage.5/15/2013 3:27 PM42Better orientation. Better Design - also for the standards section.5/15/2013 2:45 PM43Quick references to standards, preferably with a handy index like the one for CSS 2. W3schools havegreat references, but sometimes you want more information and really want to read what thestandards document says about, for example, a specific HTML-tag in a specific version of HTML.5/15/2013 2:25 PM44Stop hiding content with scripts that slow down my browser and make it harder to get to the content Icare about. It is a real art to find content now when I'm looking for something in particular. Really aproblem on the TR pages, but the organization into "buckets" that mean different things than my ownmental categorizations, and not enough cross-links between them, makes it really hard to find stuff.5/15/2013 2:22 PM45A list of links to the current W3C recommendations of the most important technologies (HTML, CSS,XML, XSLT etc.), sorted by frequency of use5/15/2013 2:00 PM#ResponsesDateW3C Site Redesign Survey22 / 37Q19When considering adjustmentsto the style for W3C Standards andDrafts (e.g. CSS Media Queries),please rate the following in terms ofimportance to you:Answered: 123Skipped: 104012345BetterTypographyNarrowercolumn widthLess statusinformationup frontClearerindicationwhen docum...Clearerindication ofdocument...Integrationwith relatedmaterials...Tools formaking iteasier to...OtherBetterTypography34.71%4228.10%3427.27%339.92%12

17)#Please specify other feature of importance.Date1"Jump to" links to example code (if applicable)5/22/2013 11:58 PM2more practical examples on each item(element,attribute,object,method,property etc.)5/20/2013 10:40 AM3Links to related / competing standards5/18/2013 8:38 AM4multiple page for documentation, rather than a long text5/16/2013 9:43 PM5Easier navigation and better organization on documents5/16/2013 4:51 PM6More white space and much clearer visibility of headings and heading levels.5/16/2013 9:09 AM7Offer a way to get a "current version" link when being on the latest document (without any date in theURL)5/16/2013 8:20 AM8Quick links to document headings (e. g. appearing upon hover).5/16/2013 6:06 AM9Mobile interface5/16/2013 1:37 AM10It's hard to say. In general W3C specifications are not intended for public consumption - i.e. they arenot tutorial in intent, are they?5/16/2013 12:17 AM11That matrix is extremely leading — a statician would have your head. Sounds like you already decidedwhat you want to work on, but they're good choices :)5/15/2013 11:40 PM12easier to extract different views of the same document.5/15/2013 8:27 PM13less circular jumping around in standards documents... I can't tell you how many times I've clicked on alink to learn more about a keyword or topic, only to be taken to the heading for the topic that I'malready looking at, or a passing reference to the same topic that again links to nowhere useful.It's likeyou're filling the page with links for improved SEO that doesn't actually benefit the user,5/15/2013 7:54 PM14printability5/15/2013 3:52 PM15Terminology5/15/2013 3:39 PM16Abstract begins on 2nd page, content on 4th. That's a lot. Info about versions and TOC could occupyless space, be a column, have bypassing links, etc5/15/2013 3:36 PM17Stop hiding things under expandos and different views of the page that force me to go throughseveral steps to find a particular document.5/15/2013 2:23 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey24 / 3745.05%4151.65%4713.19%123.30%3Q20Which filter options on theStandards and Drafts index do youuse most frequently?Answered: 91Skipped: 1360%20%40%60%80%100%AllStandardsonlyDrafts onlyReviewopportunitiesAllStandards onlyDrafts onlyReview opportunitiesTotal Respondents:Total Respondents:9191Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey25 / 3757.32%4734.15%2829.27%2421.95%1821.95%181.22%1Q21Which sorting options on theStandards and Drafts index do youuse most frequently?Answered: 82Skipped: 1450%20%40%60%80%100%TechnologyStatusDateTitleWorking/Interest GroupEditorTechnologyStatusDateTitleWorking/Interest GroupEditorTotal Respondents:Total Respondents:8282Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey26 / 37Q22Do you have anyrecommendations for the Standardsand Drafts index?Answered: 18Skipped: 209#ResponsesDate1No clue what it is.5/22/2013 6:19 AM2No5/20/2013 6:46 AM3Do the sorting, filtering and ordering in the client side. At least make it auto-submit when changing adropdown menu. Clicking "Show View" is tedious.5/16/2013 9:19 AM4Take up less space when with the revealed content when you click on something, and put therevealed information to the side, somehow, so that it's easy to click on other things.5/16/2013 9:09 AM5Don't break it please :)5/16/2013 4:15 AM6make it hypermedia (HATEOAS) friendy by adding a few rels here and there so we could basically writea client exploring the data autonomously.5/15/2013 8:27 PM7I didn't know the “current status” pages existed, but now that I do, I'll refer to them. They're wickeduseful.5/15/2013 6:42 PM8more padding.5/15/2013 6:31 PM9I stopped using it when you redesigned it to hide all the content.Before that, I could just search forwhat I needed.Now I can't find anything so I just use Google and or guess /TR/ names.5/15/2013 5:57 PM10pretty good as-is.5/15/2013 5:51 PM11I almost never use it.5/15/2013 4:42 PM12add a title search and full-text search5/15/2013 3:52 PM13Show only Recs by default5/15/2013 3:38 PM14Use of color for status(es) would be a nice improvment. Adding faceted search, considering thedifferent criters (date, WG, status, others?).5/15/2013 3:36 PM15No5/15/2013 3:29 PM16All the standards should be visible at once, rather than collapsed after the page loads.5/15/2013 3:19 PM17I hate the above filtering and sorting options as they just slow me down.5/15/2013 2:23 PM18See previous comment5/15/2013 2:02 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey27 / 3747.97%595.69%746.34%57Q23Are the “current status” pagesuseful (e.g. CSS Current Status)?Answered: 123Skipped: 1040%20%40%60%80%100%YesNoI didn't knowthey existed.YesNoI didn't know they existed.TotalTotal123123Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey28 / 3738.14%4510.17%1251.69%61Q24Are the labels for groups ofreports on the Standards and Draftsindex useful?Answered: 118Skipped: 1090%20%40%60%80%100%YesNoI didn't knowthey existed.YesNoI didn't know they existed.TotalTotal118118Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey29 / 3792.74%11553.23%6633.87%4274.19%9270.97%88Q25Why do you visit the W3C site?Check all that apply.Answered: 124Skipped: 1030%20%40%60%80%100%Find W3CspecificationsFind outwhethersomething ...Find how wellaspecificat...HTML elementsandattributesCSSpropertiesand valuesAccessibilityGuidelinesWorking GroupNewsOverview ofcurrent W3Cwork relev...How toparticipatein W3CHow to becomea W3C MemberList of W3CMembersLearn aboutthe WebW3C validatorTest suitesTutorialsOther (pleasespecify)Find W3C specificationsFind out whether something is a RecommendationFind how well a specification is implemented in browsers andother softwareHTML elements and attributesCSS properties and valuesTotal Respondents:Total Respondents:124124Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey30 / 3745.16%5629.03%3612.10%1511.29%149.68%1216.13%2023.39%2963.71%7923.39%2927.42%348.06%10Accessibility GuidelinesWorking Group NewsOverview of current W3C work relevant to a given industry(e.g,. automotive, digital publishing)How to participate in W3CHow to become a W3C MemberList of W3C MembersLearn about the WebW3C validatorTest suitesTutorialsOther (please specify)Total Respondents:Total Respondents:124124#Other (please specify)Date1"Find how well a specification is implemented in browsers and other software" I wish5/18/2013 8:39 AM2Update my account password.5/16/2013 6:10 AM3administrative stuff, to look up things in specs5/16/2013 4:17 AM4Usually I visit the specifications via Google, if I want to look something up5/16/2013 12:20 AM5w3schools, if that's official, haven't checked5/15/2013 11:02 PM6more narrative about what is happening at W3C in the WG lifes on the blog, more quick tips oftechnology on the blog, etc.5/15/2013 8:30 PM7Review Editor drafts, see issues lists, see who is in a WG, see minutes,5/15/2013 5:59 PM8mailing lists, community groups5/15/2013 4:43 PM9to find the process document and patent policy5/15/2013 3:54 PM10team page :)5/15/2013 3:40 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey31 / 37Q26What features or improvementswould you most like to see in thefuture on the public site (other thanon the public home page)?Answered: 25Skipped: 202#ResponsesDate1Consistency of design across the different properties, e.g. front page, specification pages, members'pages, community/business group pages.5/22/2013 11:59 PM2Better site map. More up to date content.5/22/2013 6:20 AM3None5/20/2013 6:47 AM4Just keep making it easy to find on Google.5/17/2013 9:54 AM5Documents as courses. A platform of e-learning5/16/2013 9:45 PM6- Better navigation and organization for documents, so that information relevant to web developersand browser developers are separated - Links to collaborate with the documents5/16/2013 4:53 PM7Though the site isn't doing it yet, the survey shows that you're considering having abstracteddocumention for HTML/DOM/CSS features (e.g. individual easy-to-use pages for css properties, DOMjavascript methods etc.). Those are currently well-handled by MDN and others and there is currently abig movement going on in centralising/merging all these to WebPlatform.org. I'd highly recommendW3.org either continue to not do this, or do so in very-tight partnership and collaboration withWebPlatform to avoid duplication of efforts.5/16/2013 9:23 AM8Examples & templates5/16/2013 6:16 AM9Some sections, like [1], are still empty with embarrasing boilerplate text. I even wrote some text [2]ages ago, but nothing changed. This is just a minor pet peeve though.[1]http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/identifiers [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/site-comments/2011Oct/0007.html5/16/2013 6:10 AM10better organisation of the site architecture itself. Without breaking old links.5/16/2013 4:17 AM11A better designed tool for surveys, issues, puiblic comments (the fields to propose answers to issuesand just contribute to discussion are not terrribly clear). A good part of that system however istimeliness of responses which I guess is down to human resources available.5/16/2013 1:36 AM12In general it seems the site is inward looking (it explains things in terms of how the W3C happens tobe organised) vs outward looking (what might possible visitors be interested in)5/16/2013 12:20 AM13Revise the drafts/spec sections to be as useful as sites like html doctor/ dochub.5/15/2013 11:40 PM14a live code editor like the one on squarefree would be nice5/15/2013 11:02 PM15I never had any idea you guys had any of the above besides the ones I checked. I used it more for areference. Make people make a profile and/ or give them a visual walk through of all you have to offer. Ihate reading by the way.5/15/2013 11:01 PM16* Better mailing list archive system * Better blog, responsive with more information for developers.5/15/2013 8:30 PM17easier to find what i'm looking for.5/15/2013 7:55 PM18Visually I wish that the WAI subsite integrated better with the W3 home page5/15/2013 6:35 PM19A good view of all the specs at all maturity levels, clearly showing how stable and deployed they are.5/15/2013 5:59 PM20A more attractive blog (the improvements proposed for the specs, or even the current spec design, ismuch more readable than the current blog)5/15/2013 3:54 PM21Consistency! I always feel like every part of W3C site has its own spirit.5/15/2013 3:45 PM22I was going to talk about the CSS validator (the HTML one is fine), but it seems it has (finally!) beenimproved. No options to ignore things like zoom:1 or proprietary -webkit- stuff but it seems way betterthan a few months, at first glance. Maybe I'll use it again :)5/15/2013 3:43 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey32 / 3723It's a mess today - we didn't have the resources to implement the last redesign completely. So, betternavigation & consistency.5/15/2013 3:40 PM24Blog Contribution.5/15/2013 3:29 PM25Remove the scripts that enforce a certain view of how I should interact with the site, and make betteruse of CSS features that allow flexible layout and accommodate to my needs.5/15/2013 2:24 PM#ResponsesDateW3C Site Redesign Survey33 / 3735.96%4164.04%73Q27Is the site map useful to you?Answered: 114Skipped: 1130%20%40%60%80%100%YesNoYesNoTotalTotal114114Answer ChoicesResponsesW3C Site Redesign Survey34 / 37Q28What do you find useful aboutthe site map?Answered: 16Skipped: 211#ResponsesDate1easier access to any Working Group5/20/2013 10:44 AM2site navigation5/18/2013 8:39 AM3Detailed5/16/2013 10:53 AM4Quick links. However, not so good that you don't always know what's actually at the other end -sometimes spec, sometimes WG home pages, sometimes something other unexpected5/16/2013 9:13 AM5It gives a good overview and it's easy to find the section you are after quickly.5/16/2013 6:25 AM6Information, but sometimes is hard to find it5/16/2013 6:19 AM7ordered by nesting, but also alphabetically ordered linklist, like a glossary.5/16/2013 3:54 AM8a-z5/16/2013 2:30 AM9Never used it.5/16/2013 1:37 AM10faster navigation to pages i use frequently5/15/2013 11:03 PM11I can search text in it, or read through the list and find stuff.5/15/2013 6:45 PM12It makes it clear how the W3C thinks of its different arms.5/15/2013 6:36 PM13Categories5/15/2013 5:53 PM14that it exists5/15/2013 3:54 PM15ability to visualize structure/ia, ability to verify naming conventions.5/15/2013 3:49 PM16Useful to discover unknown pages/specs5/15/2013 2:51 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey35 / 37Q29What information have you haddifficulty finding on the W3C site?Answered: 34Skipped: 193#ResponsesDate1Simplified versions of the specs - e.g. for HTML5, what status it is, a list of valid elements andattributes, without having to read through lots of administrative introductions and words such as"conformance", "normative", etc.Specs related to the one I'm currently reading. There should be anavigation bar, sub-menu or something similar.5/23/2013 12:08 AM2From google search - trying to find up to date accessibility standards and recommendations. This iswhat I use the site for 90% of the time5/22/2013 6:37 AM3Pretty much everything.5/22/2013 6:20 AM4specifications5/20/2013 10:44 AM5None5/20/2013 6:48 AM6What is where... no 'index'5/18/2013 8:39 AM7different wgs differ in how much uptodate info they have5/18/2013 12:58 AM8It's difficult for me to find usage examples that explain well the purpose of a specification and how touse it. Information is highly technical and this is important, but should not be the first thing an usersees.5/16/2013 4:56 PM9diffs between HTML 5, HTML 5.1, 5.2 and so on5/16/2013 11:50 AM10The actual specifications and unit tests for these. Once you know where to look for the specificationsit becomes easier but I find myself going to spec.whatwg.org instead because it is much easier to findand a better starting point. Granted, of course, over there is much less content to have to organize(only a handful of specifications, and only the latest drafts of these).And as for unit tests, I still haven'tfound them. I know whatwg/w3 has some kind of web-app tests domain somewhere but last time Iwas able to find it, it was mostly a dump of html/js files organised by username who submitted it. Not awell-maintained or complete test suite.5/16/2013 9:27 AM11Specifications5/16/2013 9:13 AM12All things.5/16/2013 8:15 AM13Finding the right sections in the CSS 3 documents.5/16/2013 6:25 AM14When you are looking for specifics answers to a concrete question.5/16/2013 6:19 AM15Specifications.5/16/2013 6:11 AM16Pretty much everything except specs and stuff I don't care about (job ads, PR announcements, ...)5/16/2013 4:18 AM17most current version of a standard, usage advisory5/16/2013 2:30 AM18Mostly using Google search to go straight to what I know exists in the site.5/16/2013 1:37 AM19It's not what I have trouble finding, it's what I come here for. Just for the dry specs/drafts.5/15/2013 11:41 PM20none5/15/2013 11:03 PM21Difficult navigation around references. I usually use the google search at the top for what I need.Should have it in the page with suggestions on what you are looking for instead of turning upnumerous results.5/15/2013 11:02 PM22historical information, there is a maze of things, but they are not easy to find without prior knowledge.5/15/2013 8:32 PM23current specifications, detailed explanations of properties and especially their values in CSS, variousothers.5/15/2013 7:56 PM24examples5/15/2013 7:02 PM25Editors drafts, minutes, meeting status (when/where/cancelled?)5/15/2013 6:00 PM26About affiliation5/15/2013 5:58 PMW3C Site Redesign Survey36 / 3727none5/15/2013 5:53 PM28Mostly documentation about how various things are done.Pretty much anything in dated space.5/15/2013 4:44 PM29WG participation, by WG or by Member5/15/2013 3:54 PM30Quick reference for standards.5/15/2013 3:47 PM31Translations of Understanding WCAG 2.0 in french did exist and I didn't know about it because theprior translated document (WCAG 2.0 REC itself) doesn't link to the newer french document. Meh.5/15/2013 3:46 PM32Almost everything. Follow your own guidelines about clarity of headlines, showing status, and definingtechnical language.5/15/2013 3:25 PM33How to participate, tools to accomplish certain WG tasks, information about a particular WG if I don'talready know where to look.5/15/2013 2:25 PM34Finding the current recommended version of common web standards (HTML, CSS etc.)5/15/2013 2:03 PM#ResponsesDateW3C Site Redesign Survey37 / 37Q30Please rate the followingfeatures of the W3C website:Answered: 109Skipped: 118012345Usefulness ofSearchfunctionEase ofnavigationOrganizationofinformationValue ofcontent toyouUsefulness ofSearchfunction9.90%1030.69%3140.59%4118.81%19